[yeatzee]

The Nikon 70-300 slays the 55-300 in every department

Shot at 2500iso f6.3 300mm 1/40 sec

Jpeg from camera

the VR?

btw, the photo really does nothing for your statement...

[opiedog]

I wouldn't call that blue wall/yellow figure pair of shots particularly consistent, there's 1.5 stops underexposure bounced. I only get 0.5 stop difference on my K100D + Sigma EF500.

maybe 0.5 stop, but 1.5 stops under, no way.

here's the same picture +1.5 stops. if that's how bright you think the picture must be, well i guess we have different criteria.

at that setting, the picture starts looking "unnatural" and more like being blasted by a flash and that's what i'm trying to avoid

+1.5 stops

[dylansalt]

the VR?

btw, the photo really does nothing for your statement...

Whatever blows your hair back

I own the Pentax 55-300 and it's a good lens optically for it's price so I can categorically state that the Nikon 70-300 VR11 is better.

With several hundred 55-300 shots under my belt I felt that it was the best 300mm consumer zoom in the world

until of course I started using the 70-300 VR11 which is also only a FF comsumer lens.

build is another league to

This was a quick and nasty jpeg shot taken from a brand new camera and lens with AWB and all standard settings.

The 70-300 VR11 is a FF consumer lens the 55-300 is only crop.

Maybe do a bit of research - many tests show that form 70-200 the sharpness of this lens equals the Canon 70-200 F4 which has been tested as one of the sharpest zoom lens around.

I assume you also own both lenses hence your comment?

[yeatzee]

Whatever blows your hair back

I own the Pentax 55-300 and it's a good lens optically for it's price so I can categorically state that the Nikon 70-300 VR11 is better.

With several hundred 55-300 shots under my belt I felt that it was the best 300mm consumer zoom in the world

until of course I started using the 70-300 VR11 which is also only a FF comsumer lens.

build is another league to

This was a quick and nasty jpeg shot taken from a brand new camera and lens with AWB and all standard settings.

The 70-300 VR11 is a FF consumer lens the 55-300 is only crop.

Maybe do a bit of research - many tests show that form 70-200 the sharpness of this lens equals the Canon 70-200 F4 which has been tested as one of the sharpest zoom lens around.

I assume you also own both lenses hence your comment?

Woh, chill there dude. How about re-reading what I said and not putting words in my mouth. I simply asked which version, and never stated that the DA is better or worse than the nikon VR. No need to get so defensive over something apparently so superior.....

I did say you image does not do your opinion justice.... thats it.

No I do not own anything NIkon, but I have a friend I see multiple times a week who does. We swap and compare each others stuff all of the time. For example, we concluded that his Nikon 50mm F/1.4 G is superior to my late FA 50mm F/1.4 in just about every way. On the other hand, my M 50mm F/1.7 was sharper at F/1.7 -2.8 than his stopped down, as well as the canon 1.4. Havent versed the 1.2 yet
Im not sure which 70-300mm he has, but we did a small comparison when he first got it. Basically minimum focusing distance vs. mine etc. Nothing really regarding optics. I was just curious which one you were talking about, thats all.

[deadwolfbones]

Having owned both, the Nikon 70-300VR is definitely superior (IMO) to the DA55-300. Different class of lens, really. But then again, the D700 sensor makes every lens look magical, so that might be biasing things a bit.

[Coldamus]

That is an interesting read about the D7000 from a practical perspective.

Re the DA55-300 vs the Nikon 70-300VR:

About 6 months ago, I bought a D90 to try out as a possible replacement for my K100ds and sold my DA55-300 to help fund a Nikon 70-300VR. (tried the 55-200VR first but it was too short and fairly ordinary).

For me, the 70-300VR was not quite a match for the DA55-300. It had some better traits, e.g. slightly better auto-focusing consistency and VR better than Pentax IBIS (especially being able to see the stabilised image in the viewfinder) but its image quality was not quite as good. The difference was not huge and the image quality still very good but mine never quite achieved the same level of detail in bird feathers, for example.

The 70-300VR is also heavier and a strain to use one-handed such as when holding foliage out of the way with the other hand. Also it not as useful as a single-lens-for-the-day solution due to starting at 70 instead of 55. Nikon have since released their own 55-300 but I have not tried that. By then I had re-sold the D90 and 70-300VR and bought another DA55-300 (my third).

I wonder whether you are seeing improved image quality due to the body rather than the lens. In my case, I realised that I should have gone for the D300s rather than the D90 to gain a significant improvement. The D7000 has changed the equation a little but now I think I will stick with Pentax unless I can afford the successor to the D300s plus at least the Nikkor AF-S 300 F4.

Now to see whether I can attach some DA55-300 samples (this is my first post):

[opiedog]

i've had 2 copies of the 55-300 and comparing it to the 70-300 (tamron), the 55-300's IQ is very good.

i can say that they're about equal in IQ except maybe at the long end where the 70-300 seems better.

55-300 has an advantage since it's wider and also lighter.

OTOH, the 70-300 works with Full Frame and the VC which stabilizes the image in the VF also helps somewhat with the AutoFocus.

the Ring type AF motor is MUCH faster and quieter than the screw drive of the 55-300. AF Accuracy has been pretty good, but that might be body dependent as well.

---

Last edited by opiedog; 01-31-2011 at 07:07 AM.

[stanic]

Pentax metering just would not have coped.

any prove for that or just trolling?

[dylansalt]

Hi

Please remember that this section is about non pentax topics so in no way can I be trolling.

Please dont take me for a non informed moron who is unable to make practical decision making;-)

I dont go out blindly and buy stuff.

Give me any dslr/lens regardless of brand and I will be able to get brilliant pics.

I took many shots with the K7, daytime, nighttime, flash, fill flash, slow sync flash.

Essentially the K5 is the K7 with the Sony sensor and with better focusing albeit with the same mechanical quality of focusing.

Lately High ISO shooting with fill flash has become a necessity in a lot of shooting I do and the Nikon just does it far better and is unerringly accurate IMHO.

Why should I buy a dslr like the K5 which for me has not the same flash capability and a focusing system that's technically behind the competition i.e. 39 zone, 3D tracking etc

After hundreds of hours shooting the 55-300 at the long end covering climbing comps I can easily say that lens based IS is better when using longer lenses.

I also have some superb/brilliant photos from the 55-300.

I have the latest version of the 70-300vr11 which in Nikon land is as close to pro IQ as you will get according to many reviews. Yes its larger than the 55-300 but for me the Nikon exudes quality over the 55-300, it has a distance meter and has rubber gaskets, it also balances very nicely on a bigger body.

Lastly due to a right hand disability (I lost the use of my right middle finger) the K5 (as with K10D) with its very short handgrip actually tired my right hand considerably and the larger handgrip of the Nikon is more comfortable for holding one handed.

There is one thing though which is a negative for the D7000 and that is the battery latch

Lastly I don't know Nikon get's it metering right with the D7000 but I have found I'm getting more of a 3D look with many pics, which I think it's due to it's dynamic range and how it applies it's auto "D" lighting.

Lastly all the above is just my personal opinion which I'm allowed - right???;-)

Dylan

[Tommot1965]

Hi

Please remember that this section is about non pentax topics so in no way can I be trolling.

Please dont take me for a non informed moron who is unable to make practical decision making;-)

I dont go out blindly and buy stuff.

Give me any dslr/lens regardless of brand and I will be able to get brilliant pics.

I took many shots with the K7, daytime, nighttime, flash, fill flash, slow sync flash.

Essentially the K5 is the K7 with the Sony sensor and with better focusing albeit with the same mechanical quality of focusing.

Lately High ISO shooting with fill flash has become a necessity in a lot of shooting I do and the Nikon just does it far better and is unerringly accurate IMHO.

Why should I buy a dslr like the K5 which for me has not the same flash capability and a focusing system that's technically behind the competition i.e. 39 zone, 3D tracking etc

After hundreds of hours shooting the 55-300 at the long end covering climbing comps I can easily say that lens based IS is better when using longer lenses.

I also have some superb/brilliant photos from the 55-300.

I have the latest version of the 70-300vr11 which in Nikon land is as close to pro IQ as you will get according to many reviews. Yes its larger than the 55-300 but for me the Nikon exudes quality over the 55-300, it has a distance meter and has rubber gaskets, it also balances very nicely on a bigger body.

Lastly due to a right hand disability (I lost the use of my right middle finger) the K5 (as with K10D) with its very short handgrip actually tired my right hand considerably and the larger handgrip of the Nikon is more comfortable for holding one handed.

There is one thing though which is a negative for the D7000 and that is the battery latch

Lastly I don't know Nikon get's it metering right with the D7000 but I have found I'm getting more of a 3D look with many pics, which I think it's due to it's dynamic range and how it applies it's auto "D" lighting.

Lastly all the above is just my personal opinion which I'm allowed - right???;-)

Dylan

I must admit I forgot that...{didnt look really}, as I just look at new posts..not always realising where they are posted....

all the best wit the D7000......I thought the Battery latch was ordinary too..but like the idea of two SD cards....

[stanic]

Lastly all the above is just my personal opinion which I'm allowed - right???;-)

Dylan

you made a statement based on nothing so I asked for a prove

[opiedog]

at first glance, i didn't think the D7k's dual SD slots as too important.
i said, put 2 4GB cards or 1 8GB card would be the same.

but, it really is much more useful than that. i'm going to be doing a portrait session with all my team members.
I was thinking of backing up the SD card after the shoot, but then i remembered the 2nd SD slot!

plug another sd card and set the role to backup!

one more plus for the d7k!

[Arpe]

I think dual slots are essential for any "pro" work. Flash cards are like hard drives, it's not if, but when it will fail.

I would definitely use the extra slot for duplication, not more photos.

[opiedog]

just like the k5, the d7k has excellent dark noise figures.
i took this shot and it was backlighted, but adjusting it in lightroom brought out the details and no objectionable noise!

way to go sony! (sensor)
and dang! that tamron 60 macro is sharp!



after adjustment

[geauxpez]

just like the k5, the d7k has excellent dark noise figures.
i took this shot and it was backlighted, but adjusting it in lightroom brought out the details and no objectionable noise!

way to go sony! (sensor)
and dang! that tamron 60 macro is sharp!

Sweet! I end up doing that quite a bit for various reasons. FYI: I will likely join you in D7000 ownership by the end of the week.

I've been lurking on fredmiranda.com for most of my info/background info. They seem like a friendly bunch. Especially compared to the malcontents on DPReview. Have you found any other (free) noteworthy forums or info sources?